Re: [5gangip] [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP

Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> Mon, 04 July 2016 14:14 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 5gangip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C67112D0FB; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 07:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zKOb88-6zEfO; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 07:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x234.google.com (mail-wm0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CE0512D0D9; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 07:14:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x234.google.com with SMTP id r201so117419814wme.1; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 07:14:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=1/UolYFnGtLbugUVM0ApFmCDlNYj7ExoNflCcBTPMvU=; b=wstaMtSg6dAqWPkLiSv2DXRed8I0sb8T/sCH5PsQSLLp3uS4Sz1h4dahLRgsCuKY2M 1N77+gkbQXjiP6+POEdoG47RylLqLU8BcqIUecmUofzZn/OIxc7E7CNlhzKPRck0Ewyz iXM0laSTS69y9YeFrx9cJbXuscrFD5fYfaQuAwA4XUSHJbyl2EJXpze8a4I3zJfXeG/w HcXBjC60eJOTG7JswabjsfVYqrILt9cgjLLibXKej/ig9Qh69HWO+KCfFDIinFsYmAim vVZu40pbpIVvqLW/V1AklF66/ndoROllBlwGHue9JQ7GVqdIpUah5jZYmhbg/j0E6I41 g1Uw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=1/UolYFnGtLbugUVM0ApFmCDlNYj7ExoNflCcBTPMvU=; b=gIQQum8BaK7stMfvuCKdlvq7E5o0mkFTHIkGhNgsBqR7QIsjs4+lvpGbHKgNPp//M4 9AwA78PSpuIr9mx+XQPQtbSGzhP1RbqRaYaMT9VSnH9aZExrvKGqIkgtVRJJgA/MrEDY Eeu/F8PzCRLj710dh6bgIvcmSyx5hdlQOlVMRscRLjXaGLQtCjE2UUaHv9RjY3QyRjEF NkUiAayQawF/Yku+C6qLfKHe//Ca4j3WIpPUO6eAeqYZRnHkyAezI88V3XmEBpk1qrQg v+3qVm1YjdlZF+VwFFtfIF5uaBRw67MFblta6LI1zsIhB3aV6aeaPO+VUYxcepsGp5dP kp9g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIhLLQbRwgQIiyPrLgCYOMCMT2Yviu9/UuVStrxJgqW3dXvgCwAOuoAVfmiUsysjosWzrGaBEHeaEPyKA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.139.50 with SMTP id qv18mr6383160wjb.47.1467641685871; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 07:14:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.164.194 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 07:14:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6C1441C1-90C3-457B-8146-4869C9FE5929@gmail.com>
References: <007601d1cd2f$3a8cad70$afa60850$@unizar.es> <576C060C.2070907@cisco.com> <00ab01d1d38d$17365060$45a2f120$@unizar.es> <6C1441C1-90C3-457B-8146-4869C9FE5929@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 07:14:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGRokOVdB7Z4TpxmCqi_9nOajT0e7b=y3VcsQrqVy1KJTg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d04095bed581ae80536cff540"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/5gangip/uaPnRUzpLO6m1ncQzG-NGoeBTS4>
Cc: "5gangip@ietf.org" <5gangip@ietf.org>, José Ruiz Mas <jruiz@unizar.es>, Anton Smirnov <asmirnov@cisco.com>, LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es>
Subject: Re: [5gangip] [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP
X-BeenThere: 5gangip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of implications of the upcoming 5th Generation \(fixed and\) Mobile communication systems on IP protocols." <5gangip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/5gangip>, <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/5gangip/>
List-Post: <mailto:5gangip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip>, <mailto:5gangip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2016 14:14:51 -0000

On Friday, July 1, 2016, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:

> So I have been thinking about a compelling use-case for LISP
> header-compression and the super-framing feature (sorry for using my own
> term).
>
> I have been told that the Radio Access Network (RAN) tends to be sensitive
> to overlay solutions due to large headers. I have also heard that there
> seems to be queuing behavior for the base-stations that send to UEs (i.e.
> phones). The fact that queuing is happening while waiting for a handoffs to
> occur can be a good opportunity to pack IP packets into super-frames to
> send over the RAN.
>
> Using this solution means the eNodeB (base-station) and the UE (phone)
> would have to run LISP. I would like to hear comments from the WG. I have
> copied 5gangip to see if they have opinions.
>
> Dino
>
>
I dont think this will fly.

LISP is a lot of work and Super Framing / packing is a edge case benefit,
especially when layering on top of all the other muck

A real benefit that would justify heavy lifting  is replacing the 5G core
with an alternative mobility system such as LISP or ILNP.

http://telecoms.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2016/06/5G-architecture-options.pdf

You can see that new core is a green field opportunity to replace the
mobility system, which is very high value area.

CB


> > On Jul 1, 2016, at 4:38 AM, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi again, Anton.
> >
> > I have just uploaded a new presentation including more ideas and also a
> section about backward compatibility:
> >
> >
> http://es.slideshare.net/josemariasaldana/header-compression-and-multiplexing-in-lisp
> >
> > BR and thanks,
> >
> > Jose
> >
> >> -----Mensaje original-----
> >> De: Anton Smirnov [mailto:asmirnov@cisco.com <javascript:;>]
> >> Enviado el: jueves, 23 de junio de 2016 17:54
> >> Para: Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es <javascript:;>>; lisp@ietf.org
> <javascript:;>
> >> CC: 'José Ruiz Mas' <jruiz@unizar.es <javascript:;>>
> >> Asunto: Re: [lisp] Bandwidth savings with LISP
> >>
> >>    Hi Jose,
> >>    there is a theoretical aspect of the work (it's curious) and then
> there is a practical
> >> one. For the latter one - section "Backward compatibility" is
> conspicuously missing
> >> from the document. On the first glance, it looks like backward
> compatibility of the
> >> solution was not investigated. Is this correct?
> >>
> >> Anton
> >>
> >>
> >> On 06/23/2016 11:11 AM, Jose Saldana wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> As you may know, we recently submitted a draft
> >> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux/)
> with a proposal
> >> allowing bandwidth and pps reductions.
> >>>
> >>> The idea is to send together a number of small packets, which are in
> the buffer of
> >> an ITR and have the same ETR as destination, into a single packet.
> Therefore, they
> >> will share a single LISP header. And this can be combined with ROHC
> (header
> >> compression).
> >>>
> >>> We have a running implementation, based on LISPMob
> >>> (https://github.com/Simplemux/lispmob-with-simplemux), which we have
> >>> used to run some tests
> >>>
> >>> This is a summary of the results.
> >>>
> >>> - When small packets (100 bytes) are sent, up to 63% of throughput
> increase can
> >> be observed (in our example, we pass from 550kbps to 910kbps).
> >>>
> >>> - In the case of securing the LISP tunnel with IPSec, the increase can
> be 935
> >> (from 470kbps to 870kbps).
> >>>
> >>> You can find more detailed information in this presentation:
> >>> http://es.slideshare.net/josemariasaldana/header-compression-and-multi
> >>> plexing-in-lisp
> >>>
> >>> Your feedback will be highly appreciated.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>> The authors
> >>>
> >>>> -----Mensaje original-----
> >>>> De: lisp [mailto:lisp-bounces@ietf.org <javascript:;>] En nombre de
> Jose Saldana
> >>>> Enviado el: miércoles, 04 de mayo de 2016 18:41
> >>>> Para: lisp@ietf.org <javascript:;>
> >>>> CC: 'Jose Ruiz Mas' <jruiz@unizar.es <javascript:;>>
> >>>> Asunto: [lisp] New draft posted:
> >>>> draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00.txt
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> We have just posted this draft
> >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saldana-lisp-
> >>>> compress-mux/.
> >>>>
> >>>>               Header compression and multiplexing in LISP
> >>>>                    draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00
> >>>>
> >>>> Abstract
> >>>>
> >>>>    When small payloads are transmitted through a packet-switched
> >>>>    network, the resulting overhead may result significant.  This is
> >>>>    stressed in the case of LISP, where a number of headers are
> prepended
> >>>>    to a packet, as new headers have to be added to each packet.
> >>>>
> >>>>    This document proposes to send together a number of small packets,
> >>>>    which are in the buffer of a ITR, having the same ETR as
> destination,
> >>>>    into a single packet.  Therefore, they will share a single LISP
> >>>>    header, and therefore bandwidth savings can be obtained, and a
> >>>>    reduction in the overall number of packets sent to the network can
> be
> >>>>    achieved.
> >>>>
> >>>> A running implementation can be found here:
> >>>> https://github.com/Simplemux/lispmob-with-simplemux. I has been built
> >>>> as a fork of lispmob.
> >>>>
> >>>> The idea is very similar to what was published in this paper:
> >>>> http://diec.unizar.es/~jsaldana/personal/budapest_ICC_2013_in_proc.pd
> >>>> f
> >>>>
> >>>> Your feedback about the draft will be appreciated.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks in advance,
> >>>>
> >>>> Jose Saldana
> >>>> Julián Fernández Navajas
> >>>> José Ruiz Mas
> >>>>
> >>>>> -----Mensaje original-----
> >>>>> De: internet-drafts@ietf.org <javascript:;> [mailto:
> internet-drafts@ietf.org <javascript:;>]
> >>>>> Enviado
> >>>>> el: miércoles, 04 de mayo de 2016 18:20
> >>>>> Para: Jose Ruiz Mas <jruiz@unizar.es <javascript:;>>; Jose Saldana
> >>>>> <jsaldana@unizar.es <javascript:;>>; Julian Fernandez Navajas <
> navajas@unizar.es <javascript:;>>
> >>>>> Asunto: New Version Notification for
> >>>>> draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00.txt
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A new version of I-D, draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00.txt
> >>>>> has been successfully submitted by Jose Saldana and posted to the
> >>>>> IETF repository.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Name:             draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux
> >>>>> Revision: 00
> >>>>> Title:            Header compression and multiplexing in LISP
> >>>>> Document date:    2016-05-04
> >>>>> Group:            Individual Submission
> >>>>> Pages:            8
> >>>>> URL:
> >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux
> >>>>> -
> >>>>> 00.txt
> >>>>> Status:
> >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux/
> >>>>> Htmlized:
> >>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saldana-lisp-compress-mux-00
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Abstract:
> >>>>>    When small payloads are transmitted through a packet-switched
> >>>>>    network, the resulting overhead may result significant.  This is
> >>>>>    stressed in the case of LISP, where a number of headers are
> prepended
> >>>>>    to a packet, as new headers have to be added to each packet.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    This document proposes to send together a number of small packets,
> >>>>>    which are in the buffer of a ITR, having the same ETR as
> destination,
> >>>>>    into a single packet.  Therefore, they will share a single LISP
> >>>>>    header, and therefore bandwidth savings can be obtained, and a
> >>>>>    reduction in the overall number of packets sent to the network
> can be
> >>>>>    achieved.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> >>>>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> >>>>> tools.ietf.org.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The IETF Secretariat
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> lisp mailing list
> >>>> lisp@ietf.org <javascript:;>
> >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> lisp mailing list
> >>> lisp@ietf.org <javascript:;>
> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> >>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lisp mailing list
> > lisp@ietf.org <javascript:;>
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>
> _______________________________________________
> 5gangip mailing list
> 5gangip@ietf.org <javascript:;>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/5gangip
>